Australians lead way in naming nonsense
ricket Australia this week announced that henceforth their national women’s team will be known in all official communiques as, ahem, the Australian women’s cricket team.
This puts them on the same page as the men’s team, who are simply called ‘ Australia’. A very good thing, too. The women have been known as the Southern Stars for years, and that name will remain in social media activity and in colloquial terms. But for official purposes, no more. Call this a naming convention.
Cricket Australia told the women’s players at a function before they head to the World Cup. It was an evening which celebrated the Cup wins of 1978, 1982, 1988, 1997, 2005 and 2013.
Here’s CA chairman David Peever: “Cricket cannot hope to be a sport for all Australians if it does not recognise the power of words, and the respect for women that sits behind such decisions.”
You might by now guess where this is going, but let’s box on a moment.
A few years ago, pony- tailed admen came up with a humdinger idea that the men’s national team should be given a moniker, like the Wallabies ( rugby), Kookaburras ( hockey), Boomers ( basketball), Diamonds ( netball) and Socceroos ( obvious).
Evidently the idea was presented to then captain Steve Waugh, a man steeped in the lore of the Australian game, who knew his Bill O’Reillys from his Ray Lindwalls, and who possessed a hard- headed, flinty approach to his cricket. “How about calling you the Cobbers”, or something similarly naff, went the pitch. Waugh apparently gave the pony tails a touch of the flinty glare, a couple of pithy views on it, and the idea promptly died. Lesson: don’t tamper with a proud tradition.
Putting the women and men on the same platform is a good, and fair, idea. Call it equality. While “Southern Stars” has developed a place in the sporting name jargon, Australia is, after all, who they represent.
So why New Zealand have wedded themselves to Black Caps is beyond me. Other sports bodies have done the same. That’s no better, but that’s their business.
What is wrong with being known as “New Zealand cricket team”? That is, after all, who they are playing for.
The fascination in coming up with cute nicknames has never been a winner on this side of the desk. Perhaps it is partly through growing up and getting to know past generations for whom wearing the silver fern and being known as a “New Zealand” cricketer was a subject of pride. Try telling John R Reid or Bert Sutcliffe they were Black Caps, not members of the “New Zealand cricket team”.
Granted, you have the All Blacks. But that’s been around since before World War I and accepted, except by some from other rugby lands — Eddie Jones leaps to mind — who prefer to call them “New Zealand” as if the AB words invest the wearers of the black jersey with some mystical powers.
So, no, there seems no stopping the march of the BCs. It never really started in this neck of the land.